RADICALIZING INDONESIAN MODERATE ISLAM FROM WITHIN The NU-FPI Relationship in Bangkalan, Madura Ahmad Zainul Hamdi IAIN Sunan Ampel, Surabaya - Indonesia Abstract: This article tries to present the most current phenomenon of how moderate Islam can live side by side with radical Islam. By focusing its analysis on the dynamics of political life in Bangkalan, Madura, the paper argues that the encounter between these two different ideological streams is possible under particular circumstances. First, there is a specific political situation where the moderate Islam is able to control the political posts. Second, there is a forum where they can articulate Islamic ideas in terms of classical and modern political movements. This study has also found out that the binary perspective applied in the analysis of Islamic movement is not always relevant. The fact, as in the case of Bangkalan, is far more complex, in which NU and Islamic Defender Front (FPI) can merge. This is so Eecause at the Eeginning, F3,’s management in the city is led by kyais or/and prominent local NU leaders. Keywords: Radicalization, de-radicalization, moderate Islam, radical Islam. Introduction A discussion on the topic of contemporary Islamic movements is filled with various reviews about radical Islam. As news, academic work also has its own actual considerations. The September 11th incident seems to be a “productive” momentum to tap a new academic debate which was previously conducted only by a few people who were really making Islam and its socio-political life as an academic project. Islamism, in its violence and atrocity, then became a popular theme that filled almost all the scientific discussion that took ideology and contemporary Islamic movements as a main topic. This Journal of Indonesian Islam; ISSN1978-6301 Published by the Institute for the Study of Religion and Society (LSAS) and the Postgraduate Program (PPs), the State Institute for Islamic Studies (IAIN) Sunan Ampel Surabaya - Indonesia Ahmad Zainul Hamdi multiplication theme was reinforced by the project of “War on Terror” that was designed to define a scheme of new relationship between Islam and the West. It is nothing new that any political project that involves a relationship between two civilizations is often accompanied by various academic projects. Orientalism, for instance, apart from the develop- ment and critical attitude that come from within, is the academic project that is directly linked to imperialism at first.1 In fact, anthropology is not immune from these imperialistic “sins.”2 To mark the study of radical Islam as a trending topic today, constantly emerging perspective is the use of binary oppositions: moderate versus radical,3 puritan versus pluralism,4 democrat versus Islamist,5 liberal versus conservative,6 and some other binary 1 Edward Said’s writings remain the most representative sources in viewing the relationship between Orientalism and imperialism. Orientalism, at least, at the beginning of its age, was a way of how the West looked at the East-Islam which was characterized by superior-inferior, civilized-uncivilized, high-low. See Edward Said, Orientalism (New York: Vintage, 1979). 2 Koentjaraningrat, Pengantar Ilmu Antropologi (Jakarta: Rineka Cipta, 2009), pp. 3-4. 3 Stephen Sulaiman Schwartz, Dua Wajah Islam: Moderatisme vs Fundamentalisme dalam Wacana Global, translated by Hodri Ariev (Jakarta: Libforall, Blantika, The Wahid Institute, Center for Islamic Pluralism, 2007). 4 Khaled Abou El Fadl, Cita dan Fakta Toleransi Islam: Puritanisme versus Pluralisme, translated by Heru Prasetia (Bandung: Throne, 2003). This book is actually a collection of papers written by Khaled Abou el-Fadl and many other intellectuals who respond the latter’s ideas. Its contents speak about the two currents of Islamic thought and movement in viewing tolerance and relationship between Islam and the West. This book was originally entitled The Place of Tolerance in Islam, which later changed its title into Indonesian language as above because it reflects the dispute between the puritanists and the pluralists. 5 Robert :. Hefner, “0uslim Democrats and ,slamist 9iolence in 3ost-Soeharto ,ndonesia,” in RoEert :. Hefner (ed.), Remaking Muslim Politics: Pluralism, Contestation, Democratization (Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 2005). 6 Caryle Murphy, Passion for Islam: Shaping the Modern Middle East: The Egyptian Experience (New York: Scribner, 2002); Virginia Hooker, “Developing ,slamic Arguments for Changing through Liberal ,slam,” in 9irginia Hooker and Amin Saikal (eds), Islamic Perspectives on the New Millenium (Singapore: ISEAS, 2004); Leonard Binder, Islam Liberal: Kritik Terhadap Ideologi-Ideologi Pembangunan, translated by Imam Muttaqin (Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar, 2001); Rumadi, Post Tradisionalisme Islam: Wacana Intelektualisme dalam Komunitas NU (Jakarta: DEPAG RI, 2007). 72 JOURNAL OF INDONESIAN ISLAM Volume 07, Number 01, June 2013 NU-FPI Relationship in Bangkalan categories.7 In such a frame of mind, Islam is seen as blocks of community, school of thought, method of movement, and isolative school of teaching. This is not to say that scientific analysis should not be doing categorization. However, the category that originated from an academic research to see variations in the community is often treated as real spaces where occupants are isolated from each other.8 What is going to dealt with in this paper is to open a new perspective that is no longer strictly burdened by binary category of moderate Islam versus radical Islam. There are meeting rooms between the two, which may not be permanent, but there are also moments of tension in certain cases. All these phenomena become so complex that it is not likely enough to be portrayed with too tight and stiff approach employing a binary category. Reductive risk of way of thinking in terms of binary opposition and absolute categories of moderate Islam versus radical Islam in contemporary Indonesia may be easily seen when we are dealing with a case of the following: on February 22nd, 2011, PWNU (Pengurus Wilayah Nahdlatul Ulama/Provincial Branch of Nahdlatul Ulama) of East Java held a seminar at Hotel Bumi Surabaya in commemoration of 7 See, M. Imdadun Rahmat, Arus Baru Islam Radikal: Transmisi Revivalisme Islam Timur Tengah ke Indonesia (Jakarta: Erlangga, 2005); Norani Othman (ed.), Muslim Women and The Challenge of Islamic Extremism (Selangor: Sister in Islam, 2005); Thoha Hamim, Islam & NU di Bawah Tekanan Problematika Kontemporer (Surabaya: Diantama, 2004), within the sub-title: “,slam 0ilitan versus ,slam 0oderat: 3erilaku Politik Kaum Islam Militan di Masa Pemerintahan 3residen .H AEdurrahman :ahid”; some other works discuss the radical Islam movement, which is explicitly in opposition to the moderate Islam. Read ,tzchak :eismann, “Sa’id Hawwa: The Making of Radical Muslim Thinker in 0odern Syria,” in SyafiT Mughni (ed.), An Anthology of Contemporary Middle Eastern History (Montreal: Indonesia-Canada Islamic Higher Education Project, n.d.); Jamhari and Jajang Jahroni (eds), Gerakan Salafi Radikal di Indonesia (Jakarta: PT Raja Grafindo Persada, 2004). 8 Critics of this reasoning are advanced by Beatty on categorization made by Geertz on Javanese Islamic character. According to him, Geetz’s theoretical framework in making such category as santri, abangan, and priayi is being outrageous and exaggerated when he delineated and treated it as tight spaces and unbridgeable distance among the three. As if, a category was the iron prison which was not possible for each category to negotiate and interpenetrate with the equal degree of activity and consciousness. See Andrew Beatty, Variasi Agama di Jawa: Suatu Pendekatan Antropologi, translated by Achmad Fedyani Saefuddin (Jakarta: Murai Kencana, 2001); See also Harsya :. Bachtiar, “The Religion of Java: A Commentary Review,” in Clifford Geertz, Abangan, Santri, Priyayi (Jakarta: Pustaka Jaya, 1983). JOURNAL OF INDONESIAN ISLAM 73 Volume 07, Number 01, June 2013 Ahmad Zainul Hamdi the 88th birthday of NU (Nahdlatul Ulama).9 It was nothing special as the anniversary of NU is yearly celebrated. That seemed unusual was the presence of the leading leaders of FPI (Front Pembela Islam/Islamic Defender Front), Rizieq Shihab and Munarman. The attendance of Rizieq was special because he was invited to be a guest speaker at the seminar. Rizieq was not only honored as a guest, but also recognized as part of NU as stated by Hasyim Muzadi in his speech that “Habib Rizieq is NU and he often said that he was NU.” In fact, Muzadi provided a defense in order that FPI was not dissolved.10 NU is known as a moderate Islamic organization, where its moderation is often contrasted with the usual violence carried out by radical Islamic groups. Meanwhile, FPI is commonly known as the Islamist group who likes to do violence. Such a definition of moderation is often stated by NU leaders who look FPI differently from NU. NU represents moderate Islam, while FPI is radical Islam. But at the time, the number one person of FPI was invited as a guest speaker to discuss the vision of his Islam and was recognized as part of NU. It was indeed a very strange scene. The moderation of NU seemed to melt and fuse into the FPI’s violent face. There was no longer restriction or at least, it became increasingly blurred. If everyone was so easy to hear the difference between the moderation of NU and the radicalism of FPI from NU leaders previously, the forum seemed to erase the distinction. FPI has now become a part of NU. At least, one might have thought that the violent character of FPI can also be a part of the Islamic movement of NU, or, the moderateness of NU could become part of the radical movement of FPI. This phenomenon, of course, has spawned a lot of confusion and questions. This is reflected in the writing of an activist of NU in Yogyakarta who has been proud of NU’s moderation for being able to be a barrier to the dissemination of radical Islamist movements.